Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

The spring system on the Beta C-Mag allows for indefinite storage while loaded, vs. conventional magazines whose spring tension decays over time due to metal fatigue. Even with only a few rounds stored in a Beta C-Mag, it's a better magazine for home defense than a stock one. Also, you might want to look up all the words in the Second Amendment you claim to support.

syrynxx:Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

The spring system on the Beta C-Mag allows for indefinite storage while loaded, vs. conventional magazines whose spring tension decays over time due to metal fatigue. Even with only a few rounds stored in a Beta C-Mag, it's a better magazine for home defense than a stock one. Also, you might want to look up all the words in the Second Amendment you claim to support.

syrynxx:The spring system on the Beta C-Mag allows for indefinite storage while loaded, vs. conventional magazines whose spring tension decays over time due to metal fatigue. Even with only a few rounds stored in a Beta C-Mag, it's a better magazine for home defense than a stock one.

Idea: put that feature in a normal magazine NOT invented for the sole purpose of killing as many human targets as possible without stopping. (No, wait, that's all of them)

hillbillypharmacist:Bloody William: It's reached the point where I cringe any time a non-gun-enthusiast says "AK 47," because 99% of the time they're REFERRING TO A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GUN.

Yeah, the editorial would have been a lot more effective if it said AR-15 instead of AK-47.

I think that what Bloody Bill from Bunker Hill is referring to is the fact that the AK-47 is a milled receiver, fully automatic assault rifle. The typical "AK-47" you hear about in the gun debate in the United States is actually a semi-automatic only clone of the AKM, the stamped-receiver descendant of the original AK-47.

Yes, it's a tad pedantic, but we're talking about two different things, a semi-automatic rifle that *LOOKS* like a machine gun, and an actual machine gun.

But i do not understand why a civilian needs a semi-automatic rifle and extended magazines. The US military managed to win WW2 with the average soldier armed with an 8 round semi-auto rifle. Why does some rando person need more firepower than that? what sort of insane deer/20 person home invader assault team do people think are going to come after them?

Happy Hours:syrynxx: Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

The spring system on the Beta C-Mag allows for indefinite storage while loaded, vs. conventional magazines whose spring tension decays over time due to metal fatigue. Even with only a few rounds stored in a Beta C-Mag, it's a better magazine for home defense than a stock one. Also, you might want to look up all the words in the Second Amendment you claim to support.

tlchwi02:i like guns. I hunt, i own many of them, i have all my licenses.

But i do not understand why a civilian needs a semi-automatic rifle and extended magazines. The US military managed to win WW2 with the average soldier armed with an 8 round semi-auto rifle. Why does some rando person need more firepower than that? what sort of insane deer/20 person home invader assault team do people think are going to come after them?

Yes, because riots never happen. Looting in the aftermath of a major disaster never happens. Multiple criminal home invasions never happen.

I'd also point out that the average US soldier in WWII also had a guy with a for-real machine gun in his squad (Usually a BAR), he also carried a varying number of grenades, and he typically was facing an opponent carrying a 5 shot bolt action rifle (so having an 8 shot semi-auto gave him a significant advantage).

I'll be honest, I used to be a kneejerk gun control-supporting liberal. However, I'm a tech journalist, and eventually I realized the same bullshiat general media pulls with any technology coverage is exactly the same as the bullshiat they pull with gun coverage, and that there's a lot of ignorance out there. I researched the subject a bit and learned to appreciate guns, even if I don't have any non-Nerf ones myself.

Basically, I'm anti-gun control now because Gibsons have been hacked and GUIs were written in Visual Basic to track criminals.

dittybopper:I'd also point out that the average US soldier in WWII also had a guy with a for-real machine gun in his squad (Usually a BAR), he also carried a varying number of grenades, and he typically was facing an opponent carrying a 5 shot bolt action rifle (so having an 8 shot semi-auto gave him a significant advantage).

Don't get stuck on stupid.

Are you seriously comparing the armament of US infantrymen on the front line in WWII with private citizens in their own homes in the United States?

dittybopper:Happy Hours: syrynxx: Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

The spring system on the Beta C-Mag allows for indefinite storage while loaded, vs. conventional magazines whose spring tension decays over time due to metal fatigue. Even with only a few rounds stored in a Beta C-Mag, it's a better magazine for home defense than a stock one. Also, you might want to look up all the words in the Second Amendment you claim to support.

You see, CNN, in a free society things are not banned based on the perceived "need" of the item/material in question. If you want it banned, it's your job to come up with a compelling farking reason for that thing to be banned. The fact that so-called "assault weapons" are used in about 2% of violent gun crimes isn't compelling enough.

/I'll kill time before work monitoring this thread//Watching the anti-gun nuts get schooled as usual

Have you ever tried to fire an AK? They're not the most accurate rifle out there.

They are accurate enough that they've been gradually replacing the venerable lever action .30-30 carbine as the deep woods/swamp deer rifle, along with the SKS. The 7.62x39mm cartridge is ballistically similar to the .30-30, the guns are light, handy, and allow for a quick follow-up, and accurate enough out to hit the vital area on a deer at 100 yards, which is probably twice as far as you can see in the deep woods.

The only twist is that you have to use limited capacity magazines to conform with game laws.

Which brings up an interesting point: Why should we extend game laws that were intended to limit the capabilities of hunters in order to foster a mentality of "fair chase", and to assure that game species thrive so that future hunters would be able to hunt, to guns, magazines, and/or accessories not generally intended to be used for hunting?

That's like saying you can't have a race car because it's not street-legal, ignoring the fact that race cars have a perfectly legal use on a track. Would you require that a race car be capable of no more than twice the local speed limit? Wouldn't that be a stupid law? Same thing with guns.

Aarontology:Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

Law enforcement doesn't either.

I've always thought that the most reasonable standard for determining what firearms people could own would be "anything that police use." The police, after all, are civilians. They are far more like the traditional militia than any of those backwood yokel groups.

It would also be a good reason to restrain the militarization of police forces.

odinsposse:Aarontology: Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

Law enforcement doesn't either.

I've always thought that the most reasonable standard for determining what firearms people could own would be "anything that police use." The police, after all, are civilians. They are far more like the traditional militia than any of those backwood yokel groups.

It would also be a good reason to restrain the militarization of police forces.

But police are expected to deal with criminals who may acquire their firearms illegally. We've learned shootouts turnout very bad when the police are out gunned.

Until the government can prevent that from happening I need at least 30 round mags.

The number of crimes committed with assault weapons with hi cap mags is less then the amount of voter fraud committed....so using logic provided by the anti voter ID crowd assault weapons and hi cap magazines should not be legislated.

Bloody William:I'll be honest, I used to be a kneejerk gun control-supporting liberal. However, I'm a tech journalist, and eventually I realized the same bullshiat general media pulls with any technology coverage is exactly the same as the bullshiat they pull with gun coverage, and that there's a lot of ignorance out there. I researched the subject a bit and learned to appreciate guns, even if I don't have any non-Nerf ones myself.

Basically, I'm anti-gun control now because Gibsons have been hacked and GUIs were written in Visual Basic to track criminals.

I'm glad you brought this up. I've stated in other threads that it kills me when the same farkers that rail on journalist/law makers misunderstanding of technology, yet freely buy into misunderstanding/ignorance of firearms.

And again, as I've said in other threads...

When you rant against "assault rifles" you sound just as retarded as Senator Stevens when he talked about the internet being a "series of tubes" and ranting against net neutrality

I've fired off the semi-automatic version of the AK-47 a few times, it's fun, but I don't know if I would purchase one.

I can't see a time I'd realistically need it, nor would I go to the range with it much. Frankly, ammo for it isn't cheap and I'd rather practice with something I carry with me then something that's more for show and fun.

Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

We know the faster you go the more likley you are to get killed or kill some one else with a motor vehicle. So Seriously, plese offer mea reasonable and rational explanantion as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer or rescue personel need to go faster then 30 MPH? All motor vehicles should be forced by law to go no faster then 30 MPH.

Yeah that is the argument you are making, do you see how stupid it is?

How about this one? We know that swimming pools are more dangerous to children then guns. Swimming pools kill more children each year then guns do. Seriously, offer me a reasonable explanantion as to why someone who is not an adult is allowed to swim?

Considering that even if automatic guns such as the AK were made illegal people who wanted to use them to kill people would still be able to get their hands on them I don't really see a need to make them illegal, controlled yes, illegal no.

Until the government can prevent that from happening I need at least 30 round mags.

The number of crimes committed with assault weapons with hi cap mags is less then the amount of voter fraud committed....so using logic provided by the anti voter ID crowd assault weapons and hi cap magazines should not be legislated.

I like the idea of cities being able to limit gun rights and not on the state level. In NY for instance you can live in an area where your nearest neighbor is 10 miles away or you can live in the some of the most densely populated real estate on the planet and in those places protecting yourself with a gun is endangering orders of magnitude more people than you, it ain't just about you...

Slaves2Darkness:Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

We know the faster you go the more likley you are to get killed or kill some one else with a motor vehicle. So Seriously, plese offer mea reasonable and rational explanantion as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer or rescue personel need to go faster then 30 MPH? All motor vehicles should be forced by law to go no faster then 30 MPH.

Yeah that is the argument you are making, do you see how stupid it is?

How about this one? We know that swimming pools are more dangerous to children then guns. Swimming pools kill more children each year then guns do. Seriously, offer me a reasonable explanantion as to why someone who is not an adult is allowed to swim?

Because swimming pools and cars have primary functions that aren't killing people/causing physical damage. This argument was just as stupid when people started bringing it up two weeks ago.

Ok your trolling, i know I get that i understand believe me, your just doing your job and you are doing well. But outlaw ALL assault weapons, outlaw them and ban anything associated with them and what have you stopped with the top two most recent mass shootings? Nothing. Cho used a couple pistols with impossible to ban hi cap mags, hell ban 10+ round mags, and you just end up carrying more mags. How does it affect sideshow bob? more shotgun use? yea thats so much less lethal. So what would you need to do to stop mass shootings, or hell even slow it down so its not as effective? Ban all guns that cary more than a couple rounds in the chamber? hell revolvers too for that matter. And then go and get ALL those weapons that fall under that catagory out of civillian hands, what are you going to ask nicely?

So pro-nogunz advocates want door to door swat actions on american citizens to remove those weapons from circulation? No, no they dont, because it would lead to daily "gun nut vs. swat rundown" with growing tally of dead that would put todays shooting to absolute shame. But hey they would most ly be conservative gun owners getting killed and conservative cops getting shot doing their job, so maybe thats the goal. Politics by attrition, whatever works amiright?

But no this is a stupid issue, with no solution other than bloodshed. But we all know that right? thats why this is a troll thread with all of us throwing feces at each other like snowballs.

Until the government can prevent that from happening I need at least 30 round mags.

The number of crimes committed with assault weapons with hi cap mags is less then the amount of voter fraud committed....so using logic provided by the anti voter ID crowd assault weapons and hi cap magazines should not be legislated.

Your point will be valid when voter fraud starts killing people

If your goal is to save lives through regulation there are far better ways to do it than gun laws. Food safety legislation, subsidized exercise programs, mental health care clinics and forced HPV vaccination would all save more people per dollar spent than trying to legislate "assault weapons".

A real AK-47 has been basically outlawed since 1986's full auto ban and closing of the registry. What yous ee as an AK-47 now is a semi-auto rifle with several US built parts that uses an AK style mechanism.

A real, full auto AK would be outside most peoples acceptable price range.

dittybopper:Which brings up an interesting point: Why should we extend game laws that were intended to limit the capabilities of hunters in order to foster a mentality of "fair chase", and to assure that game species thrive so that future hunters would be able to hunt, to guns, magazines, and/or accessories not generally intended to be used for hunting?

Well there is the small matter that perhaps magazines intended to make it less convenient for a hunter to massacre every deer in his wood lot ALSO make it less convenient for some loony toon to massacre every human being in a crowded cinema.

1. if you need a gun for home defense... how many shots are you expecting to fire without reloading?2. if you need a gun for hunting... how many shots are you expecting to fire without reloading?3. if you need a gun to protect yourself from tyrannical government... lol good luck, maybe you shouldn't have spent your adult life voting for the biggest ass buckets on the ballot.

Then again I'm not American, so perhaps I simply don't understand some obvious reason citizens should not be restricted from stockpiling small arms with few if any restrictions to protect the public from violent nutters.

Anenu:Considering that even if automatic guns such as the AK were made illegal people who wanted to use them to kill people would still be able to get their hands on them I don't really see a need to make them illegal, controlled yes, illegal no.

Until the government can prevent that from happening I need at least 30 round mags.

The number of crimes committed with assault weapons with hi cap mags is less then the amount of voter fraud committed....so using logic provided by the anti voter ID crowd assault weapons and hi cap magazines should not be legislated.

Is this the thread where people argue that CCW holders will inevitably shoot at each other because they lack the training and cannot identify the original aggressor in a mass shoot out amongst chaos and panic from the general population?

Then the Fark CCW holders try to justify their firearm expertise then try to rationally explain what they would have done in a a mass shooting situation to incapacitate the original shooter.

Until the government can prevent that from happening I need at least 30 round mags.

The number of crimes committed with assault weapons with hi cap mags is less then the amount of voter fraud committed....so using logic provided by the anti voter ID crowd assault weapons and hi cap magazines should not be legislated.

Carth:odinsposse: Aarontology: Seriously, please offer me a reasonable and rational explanation as to why someone who isn't a law enforcement officer needs to fire off that many bullets?

Law enforcement doesn't either.

I've always thought that the most reasonable standard for determining what firearms people could own would be "anything that police use." The police, after all, are civilians. They are far more like the traditional militia than any of those backwood yokel groups.

It would also be a good reason to restrain the militarization of police forces.

But police are expected to deal with criminals who may acquire their firearms illegally. We've learned shootouts turnout very bad when the police are out gunned.

Talking about the bank robbers that led to the creation of SWAT, are you?

Cause that event led directly to the creation of just what you're talking about... better equipped and better trained SPECIAL units of police. A SPECIAL unit that has access to SPECIAL weapons and is trained in SPECIAL tactics.

Or we could just give every cop in the country an M4A1 and a handful of grenades and flashbangs, full body armor, tanks and a LAW and watch crime drop to zero in just a few years!

/we're so farking weird about law in this country.//Even weirder when we synthesize law and order with the second amendment.